Opinion All the major republican policies pass, now what?

[Mr Holmes]

Because the border was secure under Trump, and didn't have record breaking numbers of illegals entering the country every week, you dishonest hack. Democrats could do next to nothing, and still beat Trump on "removals" under their inept border policies, which is precisely the case.

IIRC illegals were voluntarily leaving under Trump.

 

[Jack V Savage]

IIRC illegals were voluntarily leaving under Trump.

During the recession?

 

[Mr Holmes]

During the recession?

No, I was thinking of before then. Its hard to find the old articles, but there was stuff about in the news like this - https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...ed-immigrants-choosing-self-deport/547939002/

 

[Yehudim]

Removals fell under Trump and then have risen (both number and percentage under Biden). Again, whatever you think of the issue yourself, it's not true that Democrats support illegal immigration or oppose measures to fight it. "Sanctuary city" isn't an official term, but that's about helping law enforcement solve crimes (if witnesses or victims are afraid to talk to cops, policing gets a lot harder).

Because more illegals came under Obama & Biden because under Trump they were often apprehended in Mexico, and because they rightfully believed that they would have better chances entering & remaining under Biden and Obama. (They also believed they would receive some sort of “benefits” when we had the mass waves of Central American kids)

CBP still have a job to do whether a Democrat or Republican is in office. Amount of deportations is just another one of those statistics that lack any context.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Because more illegals came under Obama & Biden because under Trump they were often apprehended in Mexico, and because they rightfully believed that they would have better chances entering & remaining under Biden and Obama. (They also believed they would receive some sort of “benefits” when we had the mass waves of Central American kids)

CBP still have a job to do whether a Democrat or Republican is in office. Amount of deportations is just another one of those statistics that lack any context.

Wait, bud. You said that Democrats oppose every measure to enforce borders. I pointed out that both parties support all the same measures, except Republicans want to symbolically expand walls. Then you listed deportations as an example of a measure Democrats oppose. Then I pointed out that they actually have done more deportations (in percentage as well as absolute terms). I don't see how this isn't just a "oops, I was wrong" thing.

Republican messaging people have decided that it's more politically effective to frame discussions about immigration policy as "open borders vs. closed borders," but I don't see any reason for the rest of us to play along with that. Clearly, an extreme libertarian approach to borders is not really on the table, much less implemented.

 

[Jack V Savage]

No, I was thinking of before then. Its hard to find the old articles, but there was stuff about in the news like this - https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...ed-immigrants-choosing-self-deport/547939002/

I'm sure that happened, but I'm sure it happens all the time. Without more context, it's hard to draw any conclusions.

 

[Yehudim]

Wait, bud. You said that Democrats oppose every measure to enforce borders. I pointed out that both parties support all the same measures, except Republicans want to symbolically expand walls. Then you listed deportations as an example of a measure Democrats oppose. Then I pointed out that they actually have done more deportations (in percentage as well as absolute terms). I don't see how this isn't just a "oops, I was wrong" thing.

Republican messaging people have decided that it's more politically effective to frame discussions about immigration policy as "open borders vs. closed borders," but I don't see any reason for the rest of us to play along with that. Clearly, an extreme libertarian approach to borders is not really on the table, much less implemented.

There’s much needed context to statistics, because as I said, the border patrol is still going to do their job regardless of who is in office.

I’m not arguing that democrats literally don’t deport people, I’m talking about to what extent they are willing to take it, that’s where things like sanctuary cities come in to play. One side is obviously more permissive of it, but if we’re going to be that vague and literal, then yes I was wrong and I apologize, I fucked up Jack.

 

[Jack V Savage]

There’s much needed context to statistics, because as I said, the border patrol is still going to do their job regardless of who is in office.

But can we admit that deportations are not actually opposed by Democrats, and generally that they support many measures of ensuring and enforcing border security?

I’m not arguing that democrats literally don’t deport people, I’m talking about to what extent they are willing to take it, that’s where things like sanctuary cities come in to play. One side is obviously more permissive of it, but if we’re going to be that vague and literal, then yes I was wrong and I apologize, I fucked up Jack.

Well, I think it's not just about being literal. You said that they don't support open borders but do oppose all measures to protect borders, which amounts to the same thing. My point was that "open vs. closed borders" is a highly misleading way to frame real-world policy discussions on the issue, and your exception doesn't cover the gap between reality and rhetoric. I also noted already that "sanctuary cities" is also irrelevant here, as the point is to prioritize preventing and enforcing more serious crimes over illegal entry. If Republicans were explicitly saying that we should be willing to accept higher rates of violent crime in order to reduce unauthorized immigrant numbers, that would be the start of a real discussion (and this touches on a broader problem with the discourse today--and yes it is much worse on the right--the total inability to admit any tradeoffs to policy, when actual policy disagreement is almost always about how to prioritize tradeoffs).

Another thing to point out on this issue: Look at the thread about Republicans opposing border security until there's a Republican president. I think that pretty clearly demonstrates a big part of the problem.

 

[Sinister]

Ahh Republicans, always with their finger on the pulse of the issues that truly matter:

Reality TV star-turned-pol pushes for legal first cousin marriage in Ky. before claiming error

A Kentucky pol who won the reality TV show “Survivor” raised eyebrows when he introduced legislation that would make it legal for people to have sex with their first cousins – and he later claimed …

nypost.com

 

[Sinister]

When Republicans (and particularly Trumptards) are in charge:

Debt-ridden Michigan GOP seeks to sell headquarters to pay $500K loan currently in default

The Michigan Republican Party is struggling to stay afloat after failing to pay interest on a loan from Comerica Bank for more than 120 days. Now, the party is contemplating the sale of its headquarters in order to pay off some of its mounting debt.According to nonprofit online news outlet...

www.rawstory.com